buster.

As Bluedell suggests, there are many questions that would need to be answered with a unified voice. Sounds a good idea and the general direction we want to be heading as a support but we need to know a lot more detail, see a reasonably settled politcal base and be happy with those who have pushed the idea and that their motives are simply the safeguarding and interests of the football club. Proceed with caution.

Zappa, I'm not an authority on such matters but I have a similar understanding as your goodself ! Forgive my sarcastic humour (obviously not very good ) aimed at our ex-nomads and Daniel Stewarts in particular. It's just that I find it somewhat ironic that some make so much noise about the lack of a NOMAD as if it had served us in the past as some great protection from sp!vs and the allegedly fraudulent.

But they aren't a NOMAD on the AIM market ! You have to think back and realise how much protection our NOMADS (especially Daniel Stewarts) afforded RIFC from any profiteers, less than honest operators or questionable levels of corporate governance. How I hark for those days when Paul Shackleton allowed me to sleep at night.

We were relatively powerless whilst we (as a support) remained so divided, thanks in part to the extensive and wide-ranging remit given to Mediahouse (MH). One apsect of this was preying on divisions and widening them, creating gaps for some, uncrossable in the short-term. The reason so much time, money and effort went on spin wasn't because "fan militancy" is ineffective......it was to keep it at a level that was relatively ineffective. A good example was the 'crisis management' employed by the then board in August 2013 after the Letter of Requisition (LoR) was delivered. What was vital for the respective motions in that LoR to stand a chance was loud and unequivical 'fan militancy' supporting it that persuaded the likes of eg. Laxey partners that this was where any successful future for the football club lay. Now that LoR failed for a number of reasons with the fundamental reason being that they were always behind the 'eight-ball' because of the 'crisis management' carried out by MH which helped confuse, raise doubts and split the support. This made the task very, very difficult and produced fisures within the management of the then requisitioners/institutions (who provided the mandate). What it required was a unified support giving backing to the requisitioners. Not because they all thought that X, Y and Z were the perfect people for the club going forward but that they recognised the need to get rid of a cancer or at least take it's power away and put in place people who could start a process to reclaim the club. What we got was groups like the SoS coming to the fore doing their bit BUT opposed by too many other groups/messageboards/bloggers. There wasn't a recognition or acceptence of what our major problem was at the time and the urgent need to force radical change as best we could............. For this I'd mention the protestors when you put up a thread about "heroes" but also like others to take on board lessons from their mistakes. The general situation required a general overview that goes beyond individual/group interests. We should have recognised that a process needs various steps, that without that first major hurdle being jumped we were flinging shite at the moon and some had to radically change their stance. -------------------------------- Back in the day when I mentioned calling chancers like Green, Whyte and Ashley out, I didn't do it for self-praise.......I did it to firstly show a track record to make people at least listen and plead that they made any effort that they could to help force the cancer out.

One thing that doesn't seem to be mentioned regards the way the team is set-up is the positive effect that it has had on the general supporter experience and cashflow for the football club at a time of need. Rarely does a new management team and squad deliver so quickly and in such a rounded way for a football club. You play what is front of you and at present we are in the Championship and set-up to win games of football by scoring more goals than the opposition (it's working) and to entertain (it's working). Regardless of what has been said regards Cups, our only real priority is to win the Championship and return to the top tier. At this point, the management team will look again at what is front of them and tailor the playing squad / set-up accordingly.

But the truth was it wasn't the whole fanbase, was it ? You can paint pretty pictures but as a fanbase we should look to learn from the last few years and be concious of the fact that we are not yet out of the woods or completely free from those who seek to damage us............. Not collectivelly slap each other on the back and say we did fine. That doesn't mean conflict of any kind or blaming X or Y. It means recognising the way the robbing bastards operated and how they fooled most of the fans, most of the time. I called CW out at the start and when he left I called upon the fans to learn lessons but not many were interested and when I called Green out from the beginning, most whilst wary at first, gradually came under his spell. I called out Mediahouse and the way they were used as the continuity bridge for the various regimes (including administrators) and the way they operated and the latter is what Bears have to be concious of going forward, spin and it's various forms. As it stands Ashley is still using spin when he or his advisors feel necessary. Fans should be aware. It's also fair to say Level5 will spin and whilst I trust the current regime, it does no harm to keep an eye on things and encourage straight dialogue between club and supporter, leaving PR advice for other areas.

Heroes ? As you say D'Art, those fans who stood up and took action against those regimes that didn't have the clubs interests in mind whatsoever can stand tall. Individuals like Paul Murray who called CW out in the springtime of 2011 and never rested until years later, the unwanted regime was gone from the boardroom. He did this whilst facing torrents of abuse from some. The SoS made a telling intervention and helped mobilised the wider support. All that said, the fight is not over as the damage done during these past few years still hangs over us.

With the current competition for places, Aird has a choice. He can knuckle down and try and improve his game/fitness/attitude to a point whereby it is difficult to ignore (whether at Auchenhowie or on loan) or he file himself under 'never made the most of themselves' and regret it for the rest of his days. At the moment there is a climate at Ibrox where hard work is rewarded and this helps encourage the effort. If his very best isn't good enough then ok, but he needs to at least give it his very best shot.

There must be a reasonable confidence within police investigation/prosecution circles that what evidence is gathered/being gathered can produce a 'result' and in such a high profile case in times when the British public tends to be sceptical that 'white collar crime' is treated 'differently', it would be damaging if the case was to collapse due to carelessness or a technicality. I just want a fair and straightforward trial where the evidence generates the outcome. I'd also want and expect the state to use the very best legal team it has at it's disposal. It should realise that the country will be watching (if we get that far).

I'd agree that messageboards are unwise to pretty much give posters free reign to post what they like on an 'active case'. A "freedom of speech stance" doesn't really cover it as where it crosses the line, it's potentially contempt of court and whatever else that it may or may not lead to. After so many hours and words dedicated towards 'the struggle', it's perverse that a site like FF seems ok with supplying defence lawyers with mulitple screen grabs. Maybe it looks for the increased traffic that this will have provided but after the Crown Office warning, it certainly doesn't seem as if it was on good legal advice. Personally, I think there are several reasons why a panel of judges should be considered instead of the normal jury, as per the Lockerbie case. 1. Public nature of case and the high profile and unbalanced public comment on it over a number of years within both traditional and social media. 2. Difficulty of forming a jury. Demographics and 'divisions' predominately in the West of Scotland, taking into account points made in #1. If you were the lawyer of CW, you could make a good case that given his clients widespread and unbalanced media coverage over a number of years that to find a 12 or 15 man jury who were impartial and thought of him as 'innocent' when the trial started. 3. Length of trial. Could be a long one. 4. Complexity of case material over long trial.

Can't really envisage institutional investors forming a queue to invest whoever the auditor is. I think the vast majority of funds invested would be coming from those with 'emotional connections.

Spier's hasn't got an original thought in his head. He surfs social media and sees the way the wind is blowing and thereafter looks to curry favour/plagarise with certain opinions/moods.....whilst trying to be that wee bit controversial to bring attention to himself. In reality, he is a poor journalist/professional, who doesn't know a great deal about the subjects he covers. He is like a footballer who people once thought could go places (when he started using long words in the SoSunday) but never made it and has come back to pontificate in the low quality enviroment of Scottish football, where he can get away with his pretence.

If many teams in the Championship follow the example of QotSth and the way they kicked out at our 'middle to front' then I think the squad will be too light.

The Polis don't seem to buy the ''e-mail' that I'll show you later' line.

http://news.stv.tv/west-central/1327848-ex-rangers-chief-executive-charles-green-detained-in-police-custody/ Aye, try wrapping that up in mitigating language and giving it to Chris McLaughlin to publish........

Perhaps you dould delete the pic's from the post that you quote to save 'space'. Rab, you don't even seem able to grasp what my post is saying but then you've been calling it mostly wrong for years, no reason why you would suddenly stop doing so....... There has certainly been a conspiracy or two but IMO you tend to go down some weird and wonderful paths that fit with how you swallowed the dodgy geezer bullshit along the way, ie. if taken in easily by "smalltime crooks" I'm not sure if I'd follow what you said about the 'bigger picture'.

Another part of what may be considered the more important and current issue(s)........ concerns MASH / Sports Direct commercial relationship with Rangers. How did they enter into play and...............

You have been chasing your tail for years and following most of the ****s into the bargain but at least you have provided entertainment for some on here who like a wind-up. You did this whilst others warned against the procession of dodgy geezers who carefully took advantage of a situation that had got away from Sir Duped's control. LBG/Muir got what they wanted, Sir Duped / LBG got some collatoral from property purchases and the rest where left trying to outsp.iv each other in a very public enviroment with an ever more comprehensive social media network following their apparent moves. They even had sp.iv administrators lined up to facilitate the ongoing and longterm 'con'. However, the on-sight dodgy geezers were to ambitious, greedy and ultimately transparent (but not in a good way) and are getting collared one by one. We can only hope that there is an end result to the long and complicated investigations that have been going-on. The question might be.........Will the authorities be happy enough with the onsight players or are they willing to go deeper. If they are, have the 'players' back there insulted themselves from such moves ? I think LBG looked to insulate themselves by using Muir. Can Muir be got at via Grier ? Sir Duped is extracting the urine with his stance, it doesn't stack-up. He knew the general overview of what was going-on and chose to facilitate it. An open and honest Mediahouse (no laughing at the back) could tell a story that starts before Sir Duped stood down from the Rangers board (August 2009). It'll take a lot more time but let's hope as many chickens as is possible come home to roost.

double post

The amount of words that this player and his situation has generated throughout the media (including social) is wholly disproportionate with his ability and importance. Get over it and get on with the football....................

It is basically a much needed counter-attack to spell out how Ashley is having the dark arts work for him and his interests. The basic premise is undoubtedly true, a co-ordinated campaign that leads from Ashley interests to Keith Bishop to Mediahouse to various online bloggers and group (RSL). This has been fairly obvious for sometime but this blog has successfully pushed the line into the wider public domain, including background info and an immediate going to ground for mentioned bloggers to regroup/reorganise with Ramsay Smith. Rather than just concentrate on the bloggers, it's the wider Ashley interest and what they are prepared to do (and always have been) that is the main issue.

Sources tell me that it wasn't as bad as all that, with lot's of brotherly love being shared around Ibrox. Directors would even say "Hullo" to guys in corridors without knowing who they represented, honest they didn't !

In a normal world spin should be kept to a minimum but the world at Ibrox has been anything but normal fo far too long a time. Indeed, the world itself finds itself with spin occupying an ever greater part within information flows and/or media reporting. Rangers have almost become a testing ground wrt spin, how far it can take you, how recipients can become almost dependent on it and how much you can make on the back of it. Since CW entered the saga, I've always called the Mediahouse association with the club as a 'Continuity Bridge for Robbing Bastards'. A book could be written about this relationship and how it evolved throughout the years. Without the 'expert' facilitation of MH, the last few years wouldn't have been allowed to get so far. I think you have to seperate the type of spin that facilitates the profiteering for individuals or groups and the type of spin that eg. exaggerates things like signing targets. The latter, although often misleading, regrettably seems to be part of football/journalism and it's up to the individual to see through such stories BUT the former is actually doing DAMAGE to the club. As it stands, there is a PR war. The Dark forces of Evil are marshalled by Mediahouse on behalf of 'Robbing Bastards' and their MO and to the keen observer, the results have been all too apparent for the past few years. Level 5 are on the club's side and are forced to react to this. This reaction seems to be on a number of levels and incorporates the counter-attack to the Dark Forces efforts. These are discrediting the current board, the SD boycott and trying to make the club's financial situation weaker (ST numbers). The Exposingtherhats blog is an interesting and IMO an encouraging development. If done carefully with attention, detail, It has the opportunity of changing the Darker PR landscape surrounding Rangers. Mediahouse have been the 'Toxic Constant' throughout the last few years,.....we need to metaphorically blow their involvement with things Rangers out of the water.

I saw the draw being conducted and I'd remove your "obvious" and replace it with 'predictable online bullshit'. It is very common for teams to get drawn against each other a disproportionate amount of times within a relatively short time period. eg. for Rangers in recent years,........ read Dundee Utd in the Scottish Cup and Falkirk in various.